Well, here you are! This is your summer read, in other words, your first assignment for WHAP. Yay!!!

Don't forget to memorize the stuff I gave you in the summer packet. "Did you say memorize?" Why yes, yes I did!

So you know what to do. Survey the chapter, make an outline or mind map, answer the margin questions, come here to compare notes, meet with your study group, read it through holistically, answer the big picture questions. Don't forget to use the help on the foundations page; don't ignore the "big ideas" for the period and see how they are connected to this chapter.

The best way to approach this class and this book is to remember this is a story. This is the big story, the story of us. Think in those terms and things begin to fall into place quickly. Your biggest enemy is laziness. We all have that disease. But the sooner you work through that, accept that is part of being human, that there are no shortcuts, the faster you will make your breakthrough.

No one's probably going to answer me on this for a long, long time, but I'll put it on here now anyway.
Strayer refers to the Nile Valley Civilization as a "unified territorial state in which cities were rather less prominent". With this, is he saying that the civilization was not made up of smaller cities/components, but rather was one large territory? Thanks.

Reply

Bingham

7/18/2014 04:53:11 am

I'll be your huckleberry Isabella! I was wondering if any of my new WHAPers were alive out there!

The key to decoding that statement is the term, "Egyptian civilization by contrast..." That should prick your ears up wondering, "in contrast to what?" This is especially true since you were unclear about what Strayer was saying here about Egypt.

So in the para before, our man Strayer is talking about how the whole unified territory thing was imposed on Mesopotamians from "outside", and goes on tangentially (shades of de Blij) to mention that the same thing is going to happen to the Greeks later.

So now you have the context to unlock your question: unification imposed by outsiders. Egyptians unified territorially themselves, not by outsiders.

Context is the key to this class. We are going to learn about processes, in this case organization & unification imposed on one people on another people. It looks like it's about Mesopotamia & Egypt, but what you really need to learn in a world history class are these underlying processes. 'Cause guess what? We'll see this again, over and over. We need to understand the how, why and results of order imposed by outsiders. Get it? In WHAP the nouns are there to get us to the ideas, it's not just the nouns themselves.

And while I'm rambling, the "by contrast" should set of comparison alarm bells in your head. Ding, ding, ding. Bingham would totally ask us to compare Mesopotamia & Egypt!!! "I'll make a T-chart of similarities and differences! Bam!

Reply

Bingham

7/18/2014 04:54:47 am

*on people by other people

Isabella Jarosz

7/18/2014 05:44:00 am

Thank you so much!!

Reply

Cristina Micci

7/21/2014 08:22:07 pm

hey guys ive decided to get started on this and hopefully someone replies
anyway: I just wanted to make sure I have this whole Carneiro theory straight. I did this in a sort of flow chart from so in summary I have: growing population leads to crowding which leads to the need for agricultural innovations which leads to food wars. (question before I continue- if the growing population density came before agricultural advances, then what caused the growing population? ) in order to gain as much as possible, the societies at war created states in order to take control over the losers if they won. the losers were sucked into the lower classes while the winners became elitists.
is this basically the whole idea or am I missing something?

Reply

Bingham

7/22/2014 10:42:07 am

The growing population was due to an increasing ability on the part of humans to adapt to the environment, and even to alter it in such a way as to increase, and make more reliable, the availability of calories - even before agriculture. People increasingly understood, through the unique ability provided by language and therefore collective memory, the ways of the world. (Get it?) Migration patterns of animals, the seasonal changes in the availability of cereal grains and other foods, probably even salting meat to preserve it through winter. They probably got better at understanding things like avoiding sickness by boiling water, avoiding spoiled foods, sanitation, and the importance of a varied diet. Dams to store water and redirect it in useful ways.

As for Carneiro's theory, one I happen to agree with, has at its cornerstone the idea of environmental circumscription. You should have looked that word up. Essentially, in places where dense population, created by productive agriculture, creates, eventually, competition for the productive land. Circumscription means that people couldn't just migrate away because of geographic barriers. So, warfare ensues. Warfare is best conducted my professional armies. Professional armies have to be paid. Therefore, organized states, collecting taxes and tributes, are the best organizational system for producing effective armies. Therefore, the state!

Of course then, as now (i.e. Iraq) states don't say they are going to war over resources, even though that is ALWAYS the motive. They say it's about ideals, honor, friendship, pleasing the gods, principals. But, and this is one of the values of studying history, the truth is, war is about gaining resources for "us" at the expense of "them." Principals and morals are just rhetoric!

Did that help?

Reply

Bingham

7/22/2014 10:44:57 am

By the way, one of the central debates in archaeology is, did an expanding population lead to the innovation of agriculture, or did agriculture lead to growing population? Frankly, it doesn't matter to we historians, the outcome is the same.

Reply

Cristina Micci

7/22/2014 05:00:10 pm

this definitely helped thanks!

Reply

Cristina Micci

8/2/2014 12:29:55 am

still probably one of the only people actually working on this but question: the third big picture question contains the quote "civilizations were held together largely by force." by "force" does strayer mean the states power or is there a different meaning?

Reply

Bingham

8/2/2014 04:33:11 am

Don't be apologetic about doing your job. The procrastinators will regret their lack of action! They're the ones who'll say it's all too much work too.

There's nothing tricky in his meaning, just referring to the institutions of the state, i.e. Mitary, laws, tax collection, etc. Go back and read Strayer's discussion of the word civilization. I think that will help to clarify things.

Reply

Augi

8/10/2014 02:11:26 am

On pages 57-60 (the pages with the map in between) Strayer is making a list about the Indus Valley civilization saying it generated no placard, temples etc. Then says in short there was no political hierarchy or centralized state. If we were comparing this civilization to another one of the first six would we have to list out the examples of how there was no political hierarchy or centralized state or would we just be able to say

Reply

Augi

8/10/2014 02:12:23 am

There wasn't a political hierarchy or centralized state and that be enough?

Reply

Bingham

8/10/2014 06:55:01 am

Well, yes. However, a question might require you to make a comparison that includes examples. It's all about answering the question asked... and of course knowing what you're talking about.

Reply

Seshni Naidoo

8/11/2014 07:26:36 am

On the calendar, it says that on the first day of school, we have a Strayer 2 Debrief Test. What is that exactly because I thought we were done with Strayer 2, and I don't want to be unprepared...

Reply

Bingham

8/11/2014 11:30:26 am

Reading carefully is probably the most important skill you'll aquire in this class. Notice on the calendar tests are designated "TEST:" and then the topic. On the other hand, this calendar note says "Debrief Strayer two test", meaning, we are going to talk about your performance on last year's Strayer 2 test.

Look further in the calendar, and you'll see that later there is a comprehensive test on period one. 8,000 BCE through 600 BCE. that includes Strayer two, three, and my lecture on the paliolithic period, "the way we were."

Focus on learning, not grades. Then the grade will follow.

See you soon!

Reply

Bethany V.

8/12/2014 12:46:53 pm

So I am confused about what exactly is the difference between say a chiefdom or agricultural village society and a civilization? Like at what point do they become different entities? Is it with the emergence of a state govt.?

Reply

Isabella Jarosz

8/13/2014 07:10:41 am

I don't think you can pinpoint the transition of chiefdoms into cities because it wasn't as simple as a quick switch. However, I think the emergence of government was a major part of it. A lot of it also lies in things such as the emergence of inequality (between rich and poor, man and woman, what have you), a larger/more condensed population, and economic specialization. Someone correct me if I've given the wrong info.

Reply

Bingham

8/13/2014 09:41:30 am

You aren't confusing chapter 2 with 3 are you? I'll assume not.

So I agree with Isabella. Here's the thing Bethany. You are what psychologists call a concrete/sequential thinker (http://www.cgribben.com/psych/cs.html). That isn't a judgment, just educational analysis. (My job.) Concrete thinkers have to make a transition into WHAP and other conceptual courses. Here's why; you will go to the ends of the earth to find THE ANSWER. But this stuff is fuzzy.

Look at your question. It's definitional. But as Isabella's answer implies, the lines are blurry. The presence of a state is often the key component historians look at to label something a "civilization." But wait, the Indus Valley society doesn't seem to have had a government. Their society was more likely controlled through family bonds and social taboos and accepted traditions and conventions. Social constructs. Yet, they are considered a civilization. Yikes! And what if we decide to say that a chiefdom is, in a loose definition, a kind of state (which many historians do) then we have to classify them as "civilizations." Strayer spends a lot of time here talking about the word civilization and how it's used. Go back and read through that stuff, especially the paragraph just before "something new."

Okay, so what's the point? I want you try really hard to step back from things and look for processes, causation, context, variations, and not details. Work from the concept to the detail, not the details to the concept. Read through some of the stuff I said to people above.
Secondly, set yourself some learning and process goals rather than outcome goals. I think that will help you come to peace with this crazy world where the answer to questions like yours are, "well, it depends..."

Reply

Bingham

8/13/2014 10:18:12 am

Oh, and by the way. Chiefdoms, Ag Village societies, etc. are not steps in an evolutionary process (I don't mean the Darwinian kind.) They're discrete things. Societies don't go through them in steps toward "civilization." Except when they do!

Don't tear your hair out!

Bingham

8/13/2014 11:04:39 am

Oh, and also BTW, beside the John Green Agricultural Revolution video embedded on the Foundations page, Green is doing another world history series that I was going to talk about later, but what the heck. The very first one is about this definition of "civilization." I thinks it's worth your time right now.

http://youtu.be/wyzi9GNZFMU?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNjasccl-WajpONGX3zoY4M

Bingham

8/13/2014 11:15:09 am

Read Donald King's comment below the video.

Bethany V.

8/14/2014 02:25:17 pm

I definitely understand that they are separate things. I was just looking for a word to describe a settlement that wasn't yet considered a civilization.

Bethany V.

8/14/2014 02:30:40 pm

Ok, I understand. It's a grey area. Strayer kind of summed things up for me in the reflection section of the chapter, how there is no concrete definition of a civilization, etc.

Bethany V.

8/14/2014 02:25:46 pm

And thanks, I'll check out the video

Reply

James O.

8/15/2014 04:27:19 am

Hi everyone! Just wanted to ask a question about MQ 6 (Comparison) " How did Mesopotamian and Egyptian Patriarchy differ from one another?". What the question is asking the reader to compare is really simple. However, Strayer divides the section into two paragraphs, a Mesopotamian and Egyptian one. For whatever reason, the way Strayer isn't making direct/clear comparisons while throwing in a whole bunch of detail in one paragraph that is not at all discussed in the other is really throwing me off. He goes into detail about rape in Mesopotamia, categories for Mesopotamian women, and dominant male Mesopotamian deities without any comparisons to Egypt in the following paragraph! Is the key here to think of the big picture and ignore the irrelevant details while noticing the important ones? I rant because of the extreme difference of clear comparisons in this one (MQ6) and the next comparison (MQ8).

Reply

Bingham

8/16/2014 12:41:10 pm

Okay, it's getting a bit late for an old man trying to get back on a school sleep schedule, but I'll muddle through your question as best as I can.

You are correct. Strayer isn't making those clear categorical direct comparisons I want to see in your comparative essays. Nonetheless, there is still a comparison here. Tell you what, I'll answer that question myself and let's see if it helps to clarify things for you.

What I think Strayer wants you to see, and I know I want you to see, is that patriarchy is grounded in female sexuality. That's important because that is still the case today in most cultures. Honor killings in India, repressed women in Islam, even taboos about female sexuality in the modern west. This is one of the few great continuities from the modern world to today. Even in our 21st century enlightened times, women deal with a double standard regarding their own sexuality.

Okay, so here goes:

In Mesopotamia by the second millennium B.C.E., written law codified and sought to enforce a patriarchal family life. The law supported unquestioned authority of men while offering women a measure of paternalistic protection. Central to these laws was the regulation of female sexuality by men.

Women in Mesopotamian civilization were sometimes divided into two sharply distinguished categories: (1) respectable women, those under the protection and sexual control of one man, who were often veiled outside the home; and (2) nonrespectable women, such as slaves and prostitutes, who were often forbidden to wear a veil.

Powerful goddesses of early Mesopotamian civilization were gradually relegated to home and family, to be replaced by male deities, who were given credit over the power of creation and fertility and viewed as the patrons of wisdom and learning.
(Compare this to the female fertility idols we saw in paleolithic societies.)

While Egypt was still a patriarchal society, it afforded women greater opportunities than did Mesopotamia.

Women in Egypt were recognized as legal equals to men. They were able to own property, sell land, make their own wills, sign their own marriage contracts, and initiate their own divorces.

Royal women occasionally exercised significant political power as regents for their young sons or, more rarely, as queens in their own right.

Women were not veiled in Egypt, and art depicting married couples showed women and men in affectionate poses as equal partners.

That's all I can pull out of that section, and this is the level of detail and the organization I think your notes should take. I hope it helps.

Reply

James O.

8/15/2014 04:39:07 am

Also had a question on MQ 8. (Connection) "In what ways were Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations shaped by their interactions with distant neighbors? " Many examples are given to answer the question. However, Strayer does take some time pointing out how the two civilization's neighbors were affected by interaction with them. Strayer didn't include an "and vice versa" at the end of the margin question. Because of this I was just wondering whether we should really take note of all the specifics he lists even if they aren't in the margin question.

Reply

Bingham

8/16/2014 12:46:52 pm

The vica versa is implied. When interaction occurs, it's never a one way things. So yes, take note of the impact coming the other way to the "other" civilizations.

Remember that compare always implies contrast? Same thing.

Reply

Bethany

8/15/2014 01:57:22 pm

I am having trouble understanding the world-systems theory. It's the last vocab. word on the list. Did anyone find a good definition for it?

Reply

Bingham

8/16/2014 12:58:12 pm

World-systems theory is an approach to world history and social change that stresses that the world-system should be the primary unit of social analysis.

The world-system is defined as the inter-regional and transnational division of labor, which divides the world into core countries, semi-periphery countries, and the periphery countries. (Again, shades of de Blij.)

The idea here is that the core countries control the deals, the trade, and the relationships with the poorer semi-periphery and periphery countries. And of course, the core is Western and western-like countries. These western institutions function in favor of the core countries. As a result, peripheral countries have little opportunity to catch up with the west.

For the periphery, it’s like a sucker gambling in a big casino. The rules are such that while it sometimes appears that they are winning, in the end, the house (the west, the core) always wins.

Reply

Bethany V.

8/17/2014 08:20:19 am

Why does Strayer not include Nubia as one of the 6 first civilizations? According to the packet Mr. Bingham gave us Egyptian and Nubian civilization arose simultaneously. Why doesn't he count it as one of the first civilizations? Did Nubian civilization not arise independently from Egyptian civilization?

Reply

Bingham

8/18/2014 09:37:05 am

The short answer is that Strayer has lumped Nubia in with Egypt. This is understandable. The interrelationships between the two civilizations is not completely clear to historians. We know for example that there were many intermarriages between the rulers of the two kingdoms. Royal symbols seem to be similar in various periods. Trade and exchange between the two was going on reaching back before recorded history. So this is an editorial choice Strayer made in writing this chapter.

College Board however wants you to be aware of them as distinct entities. Why that they think so is beyond this discussion.

Look, World History is tough to teach. On the one hand, I want to encourage our curiosity about such things. On the other hand, I have a grasp of what you need this year and what you don't. So I'm reluctant to burden your brain with more than you need to know in this one year. You'll notice it this year in class. Someone will ask a question like this, I'll answer it and then catch myself and say, "that's enough for now." I have to self edit to focus you on what you have to know to score a 5 on that exam. In an ideal world, we'd have the time to follow your interests and curiosity to all kinds of places. But unfortunately, we don't. Hopefully what you'll see is topics you'd like to explore on your own or in future classes. You just need to trust me on this

Also, consider joining the World History Club being put together by some students. The whole point of their effort is to go beyond the AP requirements.

Reply

James O.

8/21/2014 12:30:24 am

Hi Mr. Bingham. I have a question in regard to the history jargon. I, in my memorization process, have been able to recall the main/ conceptual aspect of each term. My question is, will we have to know these definitions almost word for word (assessment that requires writing definitions), or will just a conceptual understanding of each definition do (a multiple choice or matching assessment)? I don't want to waste time memorizing word for word if all I need is conceptual definitions. Thanks!

Reply

Bingham

8/21/2014 08:20:10 am

Learning is never a waste of time James!

I'll give you the word you give me A definition. It does not have to be verbatim, but you have to know the gist.

Reply

James O.

8/21/2014 12:32:00 am

Correction: "...have been able to recall the GENERAL/conceptual aspect..."

Reply

James O.

8/21/2014 01:10:35 am

Just realized that many of these history jargon words are very if not incredibly similar ( ie: orthodox vs. conventional). What can i do to distinguish them in the assessment?

Reply

Bingham

8/21/2014 08:21:28 am

The fact that you realize those terms are similar indicated to me that you understand them.

Reply

James O.

8/21/2014 09:20:22 am

Yay!

James O.

8/21/2014 09:24:14 am

Also to anyone out there who is having trouble memorizing the Chinese Dynasties: Sing them to the tune of Frere Jacques. It helps so much!!!

Reply

James O.

8/21/2014 09:27:48 am

Oh and one last thing Mr. Bingham: I understand that the dates, chronology, and names of the dynasties are all important in regards to the assessment. But for purposes beyond the upcoming test and for the rest of the course, will we be stressing the chronology more than the specific dates?

Reply

Bingham

8/21/2014 12:05:25 pm

Good question.

We'll be studying the human story in a thematic way within the broad chronological periods. So the sequence of societies becomes problematic. That that assignment. It's a knowledge base you can fall back on when the order of things becomes confusing. There are only about six actual dates you have to remember in WHAP.

Reply

Bethany V.

8/21/2014 01:19:02 pm

Date wise I have mainly just been trying to remember which civilizations were occurring contemporaneously. I'm assuming this is enough since you said that we'll be studying the human story within broad chronological periods. Is that an accurate assumption?

Reply

Bingham

8/21/2014 10:38:59 pm

Yep. You got it.

James O.

8/22/2014 04:08:56 am

So we do not have to memorize all the dates?

Bingham

8/22/2014 06:25:14 am

Okay, you're missing the point. We'll save that for class. So let me keep it simple, stare at that paper so long that when you close your eyes, you still see it.

Augi

8/22/2014 11:01:27 am

So on Strayer 2 one of the questions was where was agriculture developed independently and we had to list all seven places. Will there always be a question like that on our test? With the six First Civilizations I feel like that could be another one of those questions. I don't know if you want to answer Mr. Bingham, but am I on the right track?

Reply

James O.

8/25/2014 11:51:26 am

It is very possible. Even then, to understand the full content/gist of the chapter itself or individual sections it is great to know them regardless and just for purposes of understanding!

Reply

Augi

8/22/2014 11:11:18 am

For MQ3 where Strayer is asking about cities the first part is Strayer describing different cities and how awe inspiring the are without actually explaining what their role is. Should we pay as much attention to this part as when he starts to explicitly answer his margin question?

Reply

James O.

8/25/2014 11:48:54 am

In the context of the section itself, no. I think it may just be descriptive!

Reply

Bingham

8/22/2014 12:17:14 pm

I'm distressed by recent questions that are attempting to narrow down "what we need to know". It appears some of youre playing a game called, what-is-the-minimum-I-can-do? I can tell you from long experience that this is a mind set that will lead you to frustration rather than success. It's much more effective in terms of grades and becoming a mature, thoughtful human being to focus on the learning, understanding the big ideas and the details historians use to support those ideas. Fucus on the process of developing your close reading and analytical skills, and trust that the mundane, transitory things will follow.

Reply

James O.

8/25/2014 11:56:38 am

Yes! I agree. I am happy because i think i just made that connection and am seeing the difference in reviewing the text when i focus on only the conceptual/big picture!

Reply

Savanna Lim

8/23/2014 01:15:53 am

In case anyway one was still confused about the term "world-systems theory", I found a pretty dandy picture that makes a lot of sense. http://pacificusblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/world-system.png

Reply

Bingham

8/23/2014 06:25:50 am

Excellent. Thanks for contributing.

Reply

Jackson Wagner

8/23/2014 02:39:08 am

In MQ7 when Strayer asks about the sources of state authority, would I be correct in thinking that states got there authority from the ideas The First Civilization generated? Or did states get their authority because often their rulers were associated with the gods bringing religion into it?

Reply

Bethany V.

8/23/2014 05:06:27 am

I know that the state got authority from the public's recognition of a need for an overarching power that could organize things such as large scale irrigation and city defense. You're right in that the rulers being considered divine gave the state authority. The public believed that the rulers were given the right to rule by God, and these rulers enforced that inequality was natural and God's will. The state also used force to enforce their authority. Writing also strengthened state authority by making accurate record keeping possible, making propaganda possible, and giving more weight to laws and regulations. It also widened the gap between the elite and the commoners, further enhancing the prestige and apparent natural authority of the upper class. The lavish lifestyle of the elites also added to the perception of state authority and power. Lol sorry if that's too much info. for what you were asking, I just wanted to answer the whole question because it's good practice for me :)

Reply

Bingham

8/23/2014 06:26:44 am

I think that is a great answer Bethany.

Jackson Wagner

8/24/2014 04:36:44 am

Thanks Bethany!

James O.

8/25/2014 11:59:13 am

KUDOS It is perfectly summarized!

Bingham

8/23/2014 06:32:21 am

I've put together a short document that might serve as a reminder about all the reading strategies we discussed last year. Don't assume that because I said that that you remember everything. It's very possible that now you need a skill that you didn't need last year. Take a look, there might be just the nugget you need for this chapter. Scroll down to the bottom, the file is called "Reading in World History".
http://www.binghamsplace.com/learning-tools.html

Reply

Isabella Jarosz

8/24/2014 06:03:49 am

Thank you so much!!

Reply

Bingham

8/24/2014 05:38:40 am

Okay, I confess, I'm kinda excited about this year. I mean, I wasn't really there for most of the summer (as I'm sure was the case with you), but now I'm there. I feel great about you as a group of people, and *blush I believe I am at the peak of my power as a WHAP teacher. I've made a few tweaks to an already hugely successful course, and I know you guys are going to blow the roof of the house!

So the general class info is up on the WHAP page. Take a look and jot down any questions you may have. We'll talk in class. See you tomorrow or Tuesday!

Reply

Bethany V.

8/24/2014 12:26:28 pm

I am finding this site helpful for the chronology of civilizations, because the timeline at the bottom of the page shows when the civilizations ended, not just when they started.

http://www.timemaps.com/history

Reply

Bethany V.

8/24/2014 12:27:30 pm

Although it doesn't have nearly as many of the civilizations as on the sheet

Reply

James O.

8/25/2014 12:13:00 pm

Now that I am a little more familiar with Strayer, I have thought up some good tips on understanding what he is saying in broad terms: I would preread and gather as much meaning, chronology, and gist etc. WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE MARGIN QUESTIONS. For me, I feel that if you read the questions first and actively search the answers out while you are reading (especially the conceptual ones), it can distract and take away from the full meaning and bigger connections. Read the sections through, look for connections and constantly question WHY things are the way they are. The margin questions are certainly important but they are rarely ever ALL Strayer is getting at.
Also, Strayer provides a lot of clarification in regards to his gist etc. when he (constantly) states a blatant counterexample. After discussing for instance, what it means to be a civilization and stating the common characteristics of them, he provides a counterexample (Peruvian Norte Chico) and lists how they were different from the rest. By looking at and understanding those differences, one can identify the similarities in much greater context and detail than by just trying to answer the margin questions.

Reply

James O.

8/25/2014 12:14:44 pm

If any one has any tips of their own, please do tell! I feel like we can all learn from one another's experiences!

Reply

Bingham

8/25/2014 12:37:30 pm

That is a brilliant insight James.

Reply

Savanna no h

8/25/2014 01:25:55 pm

I'm having trouble understanding the term "teleology"... I looked it up and it looked very ethical/philosophical and confusing. From what I gather, it is saying that nature has a purpose for us all (...?). Can someone provide an example or at least try to define the word in layman's terms?

Reply

James O.

8/26/2014 10:11:03 am

URGENT One last question before the test! I am very lost in regard to the margin question: In what ways was social inequality expressed in early civilizations?
I know that biased laws that favored a particular social class (Hammurabi Code) is definitely one way it was expressed.
I also came up with the formation of the class system itself and the polarized lifestyles, rules, and privileges assigned to each class but I am unsure... Is Strayer asking for physical expressions or social/mental or both? I feel that the question is really simple and that I am overthinking it! HELP Thanks

I think another good way to review is by going through the SPICE themes and applying them to the chapter. Like for instance interaction between humans and the environment: intense irrigation and deforestation led to salinization and soil erosion, physical geography protected some civilizations such as Egypt from conquest early on, and how it is likely that the first civilizations arose due to being circumscribed by physical features such as mountains, deserts, and seas.

Reply

Bethany V.

8/26/2014 01:00:41 pm

I feel like big picture question 3 is very similar to margin question number 7. I answered them both pretty much the same way. Am I missing something that distinguishes them more from each other?

Reply

Leave a Reply.

Bingham

Here students interact about the WHAP class, ideas for learning, and Strayer's 1st edition.